Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 410 478 CG 027 876
AUTHOR Niemivirta, MarkkuTITLE Gender Differences in Motivational-Cognitive Patterns of
Self-Regulated Learning.PUB DATE 1997-03-00NOTE 24p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association (Chicago, IL, March 24-28,1997).
PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070) Reports Research (143)Speeches /Meeting Papers (150)
EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Adolescents; Cognitive Processes; *Cognitive Style; Goal
Orientation; Grade 7; Junior High Schools; *LearningMotivation; *Learning Processes; Learning Strategies;Motivation; Self Esteem; Self Motivation; *Sex Differences;*Thinking Skills
IDENTIFIERS *Self Regulated Learning
ABSTRACTMany of the reasons offered for the difference between boys
and girls in certain kinds of cognitive tasks have been attributed tobiology. However, other factors need to be considered, and so the role thatmotivation and learning play in gender differences is addressed in thispaper. The focus rests on gender differences, both in the individual factorsaffecting self-regulatory learning activity, and in the relations among thesefactors. A dispositional approach to motivation was adopted in order toexamine individual differences at a general level. Self-report measuresassessing goal orientations, control beliefs, self-esteem, and learningstrategy use were administered to 628 seventh-grade students. The findingswere consistent with previous research in that boys' and girls'motivational-cognitive profiles were slightly different. Boys were moreinclined to performance goals and they reported using more superficiallearning strategies (e.g., rote-learning and detail memorizing) than girls.The results also suggest that students' motivational orientations and theunderlying mechanisms might differ as a function of gender. These findingshave implications for research on self-regulated learning in general andgender differences in particular. (Contains 50 references.) (RJM)
********************************************************************************
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.
********************************************************************************
Gender Differences in Motivational-Cognitive Patternsof Self-Regulated Learning
Markku Niemivirta
Department of EducationUniversity of Helsinki
113En COPY HAM LE
"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
1'k- L\11
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and improvement
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)
.0 This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction Quality.
Points of view or opinions stated in this docuTO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES ment do not necessarily represent officialINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)... OERI position or policy. J
Gen
der
Diff
eren
ces
in M
otiv
atio
nal-C
ogni
tive
Pat
tern
s of
Sel
f-R
egul
ated
Lea
rnin
g
MA
RK
KU
NIE
MIV
IRT
A"c
Dep
artm
ent o
f E
duca
tion,
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
elsi
nki
AB
STR
AC
T
Thi
s pa
per
addr
esse
s th
e qu
estio
n of
gen
der
diff
eren
ces
in m
otiv
atio
n an
d le
arn-
ing.
The
mai
n go
al w
as to
exa
min
e ge
nder
dif
fere
nces
bot
h in
the
indi
vidu
al f
ac-
tors
aff
ectin
g se
lf-r
egul
ator
y le
arni
ng a
ctiv
ity, a
nd in
the
rela
tions
am
ong
thes
efa
ctor
s. S
elf-
repo
rt m
easu
res
asse
ssin
g go
al o
rien
tatio
ns, c
ontr
ol b
elie
fs,
self
-es
teem
, and
lear
ning
str
ateg
y us
e w
ere
adm
inis
tere
d to
628
sev
enth
-gra
de ju
nior
high
sch
ool s
tude
nts.
Bot
h pa
ttern
-ori
ente
d (e
.g.,
clus
ter-
anal
ytic
app
roac
h) a
ndva
riab
le-o
rien
ted
anal
yses
(e.
g., s
truc
tura
l equ
atio
n m
odel
ing)
wer
e pe
rfor
med
on
the
data
. Res
ults
sho
wed
that
boy
s' a
nd g
irls
' mot
ivat
iona
l-co
gniti
ve p
rofi
les
wer
esl
ight
ly d
iffe
rent
. Boy
s w
ere
mor
e in
clin
ed to
per
form
ance
goa
ls a
nd r
epor
ted
us-
ing
mor
e su
perf
icia
l lea
rnin
g st
rate
gies
(e.
g., r
ote-
lear
ning
and
det
ail m
emor
izin
g)th
an g
irls
. The
res
ults
als
o su
gges
t tha
t stu
dent
s' m
otiv
atio
nal o
rien
tatio
ns a
ndth
e un
derl
ying
mec
hani
sms
mig
ht d
iffe
r as
a f
unct
ion
of g
ende
r.
INT
RO
DU
CT
ION
Gen
der
diff
eren
ces
have
bee
n of
gre
at in
tere
st in
edu
catio
nal a
nd p
sych
o-lo
gica
l res
earc
h (c
f. M
acco
by &
Jac
k lin
, 197
4). S
tudi
es f
ocus
ing
on le
arni
ngha
ve m
ainl
y ex
amin
ed g
ende
r-re
late
d di
ffer
ence
s in
eith
er c
ogni
tive
ante
ce-
dent
s (H
alpe
rn, 1
992)
or
gene
ral o
utco
mes
(i.e
., ac
hiev
emen
t and
per
form
ance
)of
lear
ning
(H
yde,
Fen
nem
a &
Lam
on, 1
990;
Lin
n &
Hyd
e, 1
989;
Kah
le &
Mee
ce, 1
994)
. Stu
dies
on
cogn
itive
abi
litie
s ha
ve s
how
ed f
airl
y co
nsis
tent
gen
-de
r di
ffer
ence
sat
leas
t for
mem
ory,
lang
uage
flu
ency
, and
mat
hem
atic
al r
ea-
soni
ng a
bilit
ies
over
the
past
dec
ades
, and
sim
ilar
gaps
hav
e al
so b
een
foun
din
ach
ieve
men
t: B
oys
have
out
perf
orm
ed g
irls
in c
ogni
tive
task
s re
quir
ing
me-
chan
ical
rea
soni
ng o
r vi
suo-
spat
ial p
roce
ssin
g, w
here
as g
irls
hav
e do
ne b
ette
r in
task
s re
quir
ing
verb
al a
bilit
ies
(Stu
mpf
, 199
5; a
lthou
gh s
ee L
ynn
& H
yde,
Pape
r pr
esen
ted
at th
e an
nual
mee
ting
of th
e A
mer
ican
Edu
catio
nal R
esea
rch
Ass
ocia
tion,
Chi
cago
, IL
, Mar
ch 1
997.
Ple
ase
addr
ess
all c
orre
spon
denc
e to
: Mar
kku
Nie
miv
irta
, Dep
artm
ent
of E
duca
tion,
P.O
.Box
39,
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
elsi
nki,
Finl
and.
E-m
ail:
mar
kku.
niem
ivir
ta @
hels
inki
.fi
1989
). F
urth
erm
ore,
boy
s sc
ore
high
er th
an g
irls
in s
cien
ce a
nd m
athe
mat
ics
achi
evem
ent t
ests
, whi
le th
e op
posi
te m
ay b
e tr
ue in
lang
uage
s (H
alpe
rn, 1
992;
Mar
sh, 1
989)
.T
hese
dif
fere
nces
hav
e be
en e
xpla
ined
mos
tly in
term
s of
bio
logi
cal f
acto
rs,
gend
er-r
ole
ster
eoty
pes
and
soci
aliz
atio
n ex
peri
ence
s (e
.g.,
Ecc
les-
Pars
ons
et a
l.,19
82; H
alpe
rn, 1
992)
. The
und
erly
ing
assu
mpt
ion
in e
xpla
natio
ns e
mph
asiz
ing
soci
etal
fac
tors
is th
at d
iffe
rent
ial s
ex-r
ole
soci
aliz
atio
n pa
ttern
s af
fect
the
scho
ol-r
elat
ed a
ttitu
des,
val
ues,
and
sel
f-pe
rcep
tions
stu
dent
s' d
evel
opas
they
grow
up,
whi
ch in
turn
aff
ect t
he q
ualit
y an
d fo
rm o
f ac
tiviti
es s
tude
nts'
em
ploy
in le
arni
ng s
ituat
ions
. A la
rge
body
of
stud
ies
have
dem
onst
rate
d th
at g
irls
do
have
low
er e
xpec
tatio
ns o
f su
cces
s an
d le
ss c
onfi
denc
e in
thei
r ab
ility
to le
arn
in, f
or e
xam
ple,
mat
hem
atic
s th
an b
oys
(e.g
., E
ccle
s, 1
985)
. On
the
othe
r ha
nd,
Skaa
lvik
and
Ran
kin
(199
5) f
ound
that
gir
ls w
ere
mor
e m
otiv
ated
to s
tudy
lan-
guag
es th
an b
oys
desp
ite th
e fa
ct th
at th
ere
wer
e no
dif
fere
nces
in th
eir
verb
alse
lf-c
onfi
denc
e. S
imila
r re
sults
wer
e ob
tain
ed in
a s
tudy
by
Mar
sh (
1989
).1
How
ever
, the
re is
als
o ev
iden
ce th
at g
ende
r-di
ffer
ence
s m
ight
vary
acc
ordi
ng to
the
mea
sure
men
ts u
sed.
For
exa
mpl
e, B
enbo
w a
nd S
tanl
ey (
1982
) no
ticed
that
duri
ng th
e ju
nior
hig
h sc
hool
and
hig
h sc
hool
yea
rs g
irls
ach
ieve
d si
gnif
ican
tlyhi
gher
mat
hem
atic
s gr
ades
than
did
boy
s (s
ee a
lso
Stoc
kard
& W
ood,
198
4).
Bas
ed o
n th
is, s
ome
rese
arch
ers
have
hyp
othe
size
d th
at g
irls
mig
ht a
dopt
a ro
tele
arni
ng a
ppro
ach
to m
athe
mat
ics
that
pro
ves
an a
dvan
tage
on c
lass
room
ex-
ams,
whe
reas
boy
s te
nd h
ave
a m
ore
auto
nom
ous
appr
oach
on
mat
hem
atic
sle
arni
ng th
at f
acili
tate
s pe
rfor
man
ce o
n st
anda
rdiz
ed te
sts
(Boh
lin, 1
994;
Kim
-ba
ll, 1
989;
see
als
o Fe
nnem
a &
Pet
erso
n, 1
985)
. How
ever
, con
side
ring
the
fact
sth
at s
tudi
es e
xam
inin
g th
is a
ssum
ptio
n do
not
pro
vide
una
mbi
guou
s fi
ndin
gs(c
f. M
eece
& J
ones
, 199
6), a
nd th
at s
imila
r ge
nder
dif
fere
nces
(i.e
., gi
rls
earn
high
er g
rade
s) c
an a
lso
be f
ound
in o
vera
ll sc
hool
ach
ieve
men
tat
leas
t In
Scan
dina
via
(Em
anue
lsso
n &
Fis
chbe
in, 1
986;
Und
heim
& N
ordv
ik, 1
992),
the
expl
anat
ion
need
s fu
rthe
r el
abor
atio
n. T
he f
ocus
of
the
pres
ent s
tudy
isth
us o
n ge
nder
dif
fere
nces
in m
otiv
atio
n an
d se
lf-p
erce
ptio
nsat
a m
ore
gene
ral
leve
l.
1 T
here
is a
lso
evid
ence
of
gend
er d
iffe
renc
es in
the
accu
racy
and
bia
s of
sel
f-ev
alua
tions
of
per-
form
ance
. Acc
ordi
ng to
Bey
er a
nd B
owde
n (i
n pr
ess)
fem
ales
fre
quen
tly u
nder
estim
ate
thei
rpe
r-fo
rman
ce, w
hich
aga
in m
ay h
ave
pote
ntia
lly d
amag
ing
cons
eque
nces
on s
ubse
quen
t per
fom
ance
.
TH
EO
RE
TIC
AL
BA
CK
GR
OU
ND
The
fra
mew
ork
of th
e st
udy
build
s on
cur
rent
res
earc
h on
sel
f-re
gula
ted
lear
ning
(Sc
hunk
& Z
imm
erm
an, 1
989)
. Som
e of
the
mod
els
tryi
ng to
exp
lain
gend
er d
iffe
renc
es in
ach
ieve
men
t are
bas
ed o
n th
e no
tion
of a
uton
omou
s an
din
depe
nden
t lea
rnin
g be
havi
or (
e.g.
, Fen
nem
a &
Pet
erso
n, 1
985)
. The
und
erly
-in
g as
sum
ptio
n in
thes
e m
odel
s is
that
in o
rder
to le
arn
to d
o ta
sks
of h
igh
cogn
itive
com
plex
ity o
ne m
ust e
ngag
e in
inde
pend
ent a
nd p
ersi
sten
t lea
rnin
gac
tivity
. In
othe
r w
ords
, bes
ides
em
ploy
ing
prop
er "
cogn
itive
tool
s" in
a le
arn-
ing
task
, stu
dent
s m
ust a
lso
be m
otiv
ated
and
com
mitt
ed to
do
so. A
s se
lf-
regu
latio
n of
lear
ning
(SR
L)
refe
rs to
pro
cess
es w
here
by s
tude
nts
activ
ate
and
sust
ain
cogn
ition
s, b
ehav
iors
, and
aff
ects
that
are
sys
tem
atic
ally
ori
ente
d to
war
dth
e at
tain
men
t of
goal
s (S
chun
k 19
94),
it c
lear
ly p
rovi
des
an a
pplic
able
con
cep-
tual
bas
is f
or th
e st
udy.
How
ever
, def
inin
g re
gula
tion
in S
RL
as
indi
vidu
al's
ef-
fect
ive
regu
latio
n of
cog
nitiv
e an
d m
etac
ogni
tive
reso
urce
s do
es n
ot f
ully
de-
scri
be th
e co
mpl
exity
of
regu
lato
ry a
ctiv
ities
stu
dent
s em
ploy
in n
atur
al le
arn-
ing
situ
atio
ns (
cf. G
arci
a, 1
995)
. Lea
rnin
g si
tuat
ions
are
not
alw
ays
perc
eive
d as
inte
rest
ing
and
chal
leng
ing
task
s th
at r
equi
re s
ome
cogn
itive
and
mot
ivat
iona
lef
fort
. In
othe
r w
ords
, stu
dent
s' b
ehav
ior
in a
cla
ssro
om m
ay b
e di
rect
ed n
oton
ly to
war
ds e
nlar
ging
per
sona
l res
ourc
es (
e.g.
, gai
ning
kno
wle
dge
or im
prov
-in
g sk
ills)
, but
als
o to
war
ds p
reve
ntin
g lo
sses
of
reso
urce
s an
d di
stor
tions
of
wel
l-be
ing
(e.g
.,pr
otec
ting
the
self
fro
m e
stee
m-t
hrea
teni
ngsi
tuat
ions
)(B
oeka
erts
, 199
3; C
ovin
gton
, 199
2). T
his
dist
inct
ion
betw
een
appr
oach
and
avoi
danc
e m
otiv
atio
n in
ach
ieve
men
t situ
atio
ns (
see
Elli
ot &
Har
acki
ewic
z,19
96)
hold
s an
impl
icit
assu
mpt
ion
that
sel
f-re
gula
tion
is in
here
nt in
goa
l-di
rect
ed e
ngag
emen
t (C
arve
r &
Sch
eier
, 199
1) a
nd th
at it
may
em
erge
in d
if-
fere
nt f
orm
s de
pend
ing
on th
e ad
aptiv
e fu
nctio
n of
the
actio
n its
elf
(see
Ni-
emiv
irta
, 199
6).
Thi
s is
ver
y ill
ustr
atin
g in
des
crip
tions
of
child
ren'
s re
actio
ns to
fai
lure
inle
arni
ng s
ituat
ions
. For
exa
mpl
e, th
e ea
rly
stud
ies
by C
arol
Dw
eck
and
her
col-
leag
ues
(Die
ner
& D
wec
k, 1
978;
Dw
eck
& B
empe
chat
, 198
3) d
emon
stra
te h
owso
me
child
ren'
s "h
elpl
ess"
pat
tern
of
beha
vior
is c
hara
cter
ized
by
an a
void
ance
of c
halle
nge
and
attr
ibut
ing
failu
re to
lack
of
abili
ty, w
here
as o
ther
chi
ldre
n's
"mas
tery
" pa
ttern
is c
hara
cter
ized
by
mai
nten
ance
of
effe
ctiv
e st
rivi
ng u
nder
failu
re a
nd s
eeki
ng f
or c
halle
ngin
g ta
sks.
Sub
sequ
ent r
esea
rch
on th
is is
sue
have
led
to a
dif
fere
ntia
tion
of th
ree
dist
inct
set
s of
goa
ls s
tude
nts
may
ado
pt in
5
scho
ol (
Am
es &
Arc
her,
198
8; D
wec
k &
Elli
ott,
1988
; Nic
holls
, 198
4): I
ndi-
vidu
als
who
pur
sue
lear
ning
goa
ls s
eek
to im
prov
e th
eir
abili
ties
and
unde
rsta
nd-
ing;
lear
ning
is v
alue
d as
an
end
in it
self
. In
cont
rast
, ind
ivid
uals
who
pur
sue
perf
orm
ance
goa
ls s
eek
to d
emon
stra
te h
igh
abili
ty o
r to
gai
n fa
vora
ble
judg
men
tsof
thei
r ab
ilitie
s. W
hile
thes
e tw
o go
als
are
orie
nted
tow
ards
atta
inin
g so
me-
thin
g, a
thir
d ty
pe o
f go
al, n
amel
y av
oida
nce
goal
(se
e N
icho
lls, P
atas
hnic
k an
dN
olen
, 198
5), i
nvol
ves
a de
sire
to p
ut f
orth
as
little
eff
ort a
s po
ssib
le a
nd g
etaw
ay w
ith it
(i.e
., a
form
of
avoi
danc
e m
otiv
atio
n). T
his
is in
acc
orda
nce
with
Dw
eck
and
Leg
gett'
s (1
988)
not
ion
that
a b
ehav
iora
l pat
tern
is a
fun
ctio
n of
both
goa
l and
con
fide
nce
in a
bilit
y. W
hen
conf
iden
ce is
hig
h, b
oth
lear
ning
and
perf
orm
ance
goa
ls w
ill p
rodu
ce h
igh
effo
rt (
alth
ough
the
qual
ity o
f th
e en
-ga
gem
ent i
tsel
f m
ay v
ary;
cf.
Shr
aw e
t al.
1995
), b
ut w
hen
conf
iden
ce is
low
,pe
rfor
man
ce g
oals
will
pro
duce
"he
lple
ssne
ss".
Dw
eck
and
Bem
pech
at (
1983
)ha
ve a
rgue
d th
at th
e em
erge
nce
of d
iffe
rent
mot
ivat
iona
l ori
enta
tions
is p
ar-
tially
bas
ed o
n st
uden
ts' p
reco
ncep
tions
abo
ut th
emse
lves
and
thei
r re
latio
ns to
the
surr
ound
ing
wor
ld. T
hese
impl
icit
theo
ries
i.e.,
"alte
rnat
ive
way
s of
con
-st
ruct
ing
real
ity, e
ach
with
its
pote
ntia
l cos
ts a
nd b
enef
its"
(Dw
eck
et a
l. 19
95,
p. 2
68)
then
gui
de th
e ch
oice
and
pur
suit
of g
oals
.A
noth
er r
elat
ed c
onst
ruct
is s
tude
nts'
mea
ns-e
nds
belie
fs (
Skin
ner
et a
l.,19
88).
Mea
ns-e
nds
belie
fs r
efer
to in
divi
dual
s' e
xpec
tanc
ies
abou
t the
ext
ent t
ow
hich
cer
tain
cla
sses
of
pote
ntia
l cau
ses
prod
uce
cert
ain
outc
omes
. It c
ould
be
assu
med
, for
exa
mpl
e, th
at s
tude
nts
who
hol
d an
incr
emen
tal b
elie
f th
at a
bilit
yis
a f
ixed
, non
mal
leab
le tr
ait (
see
Dw
eck
& L
egge
tt, 1
988)
mig
ht a
lso
belie
veth
at a
bilit
y is
the
prim
ary
dete
rmin
ant o
f le
arni
ng a
nd a
chie
vem
ent.
In c
on-
tras
t, st
uden
ts w
ho v
iew
abi
lity
as a
mal
leab
le q
ualit
y th
at c
an b
e ch
ange
d an
dde
velo
ped,
mig
ht e
mph
asiz
e m
ore
effo
rt a
s a
mea
ns f
or le
arni
ng.
The
goa
ls a
nd m
otiv
atio
nal o
rien
tatio
ns s
tude
nts
adop
t als
o af
fect
the
stra
tegi
es s
tude
nts
utili
ze in
lear
ning
situ
atio
ns. L
earn
ing
orie
nted
eng
agem
ent
is e
xem
plif
ied
by a
n in
trin
sica
lly m
otiv
ated
and
task
-foc
used
lear
ning
act
ivity
that
has
its
goal
s in
per
sona
l kno
wle
dge
cons
truc
tion.
As
stud
ent's
inte
nt is
toun
ders
tand
and
cre
ate
mea
ning
s, s
/he
also
use
s (o
r tr
ies
to u
se)
stra
tegi
es th
aten
able
him
or
her
to s
triv
e fo
r th
at g
oal (
i.e.,
deep
pro
cess
ing
stra
tegi
es; s
ee P
in-
tric
h &
De
Gro
ot 1
990)
. Mor
e ex
trin
sica
lly m
otiv
ated
and
per
form
ance
ori
-en
ted
stud
ent i
nste
ad tr
ies
to d
o w
hate
ver
is n
eces
sary
to a
chie
ve, a
nd th
ereb
yus
es w
hate
ver
stra
tegi
es n
eede
d "t
o ge
t the
job
done
" al
thou
gh m
ainl
y re
pro-
duci
ng a
nd f
act-
rote
str
ateg
ies
(Gra
ham
& G
olan
, 199
1; M
eece
, Blu
men
feld
, &
6
Hoy
le, 1
988;
Nol
en, 1
988)
. A s
elf-
prot
ectiv
e fo
rm o
f ad
aptiv
e se
lf-r
egul
ator
y ac
-tiv
ity, i
n co
ntra
st, i
s gr
ound
ed o
n av
oidi
ng p
oten
tial n
egat
ive
outc
omes
. Thu
s,it
arou
ses
proc
esse
s th
at in
terf
ere
with
opt
imal
and
con
stru
ctiv
e ta
sk e
ngag
e-m
ent.
Sens
itivi
ty to
fai
lure
-rel
evan
t inf
orm
atio
n an
d pr
eocc
upat
ion
with
abi
lity
rath
er th
an ta
sk c
once
rns
lead
eas
ily to
hel
ples
s pa
ttern
s of
beh
avio
r (B
oeka
erts
,19
93; L
ehtin
en e
t al.,
199
5; N
iem
ivir
ta, 1
996)
.T
he v
iew
pre
sent
ed a
bove
pla
ces
expl
icitl
y th
e se
lf a
t the
nuc
leus
of
any
self
-re
gula
tory
act
iviti
es (
as th
e co
ncep
t its
elf
impl
ies)
. Tha
t is,
the
belie
fs in
divi
du-
als
have
con
stru
ed a
bout
them
selv
es a
nd th
eir
rela
tions
to th
e su
rrou
ndin
gw
orld
hav
e an
ess
entia
l eff
ect o
n th
e in
terp
reta
tions
, cho
ices
, and
act
s th
eyca
rry
out i
n va
riou
s si
tuat
ions
(Sk
inne
r 19
95).
A n
umbe
r of
stu
dies
hav
e de
m-
onst
rate
d ho
w s
elf-
refe
renc
ed b
elie
fs a
ffec
t stu
dent
s in
form
atio
n pr
oces
sing
and
appr
oach
es to
lear
ning
(fo
r a
revi
ew, s
ee S
chun
k &
Mee
ce, 1
992)
. It h
as b
een
argu
ed, f
or e
xam
ple,
that
stu
dent
s w
ith h
igh
self
-eff
icac
y an
d pe
rcei
ved
cont
rol
wor
k ha
rder
and
per
sist
long
er o
n a
task
whe
n fa
cing
dif
ficu
lties
, and
, sub
se-
quen
tly, t
hey
also
per
form
bet
ter
than
stu
dent
s w
ho la
ck s
elf-
effi
cacy
(e.
g.,
Schu
nk 1
991)
even
with
in th
e sa
me
abili
ty le
vel.
Alth
ough
muc
h of
the
rese
arch
exa
min
ing
thes
e re
latio
ns h
ave
focu
sed
onin
divi
dual
eith
er in
trai
ndiv
idua
l (Pi
ntri
ch &
Gar
cia
1993
) or
inte
rind
ivid
ual
(Zim
mer
man
& M
artin
ez-P
ons
1990
)di
ffer
ence
s, o
nly
few
hav
e di
spla
yed
ex-
plic
it in
tere
st in
exa
min
ing
whe
ther
the
stre
ngth
and
pat
tern
ing
of th
e di
ffer
-en
ces
vari
es a
ccor
ding
to g
ende
r. T
he f
ew s
tudi
es c
ondu
cted
with
in th
e fr
ame-
wor
k of
sel
f-re
gula
ted
lear
ning
sug
gest
that
som
e re
petit
ious
dif
fere
nces
mig
htex
ist.
In th
eir
stud
y re
latin
g gr
ade,
gen
der,
and
gif
tedn
ess
to s
elf-
effi
cacy
and
stra
tegy
use
, Zim
mer
man
and
Mar
tinez
-Pon
s (1
990)
con
clud
ed th
at th
e"f
indi
ngs
show
gre
ater
use
of
self
-reg
ulat
ed le
arni
ng s
trat
egie
s by
gir
ls d
espi
teth
eir
bein
g lo
wer
than
boy
s in
ver
bal e
ffic
acy"
(p.
57)
. Mee
ce a
nd H
olt (
1993
)al
so f
ound
that
gir
ls w
ere
mor
e lik
ely
to h
ave
lear
ning
as
a pr
imar
y go
al,
whe
reas
boy
s w
ere
mor
e in
clin
ed to
per
form
ance
goa
ls. S
imila
r re
sults
al-
thou
gh w
ith o
lder
stu
dent
sw
ere
foun
d in
a s
tudy
by
Bou
ffar
d, B
oisv
ert,
Vez
eau,
and
Lar
ouch
e (1
995)
. Fur
ther
mor
e, th
eir
resu
lts a
lso
indi
cate
d a
poss
i-bi
lity
that
the
rela
tions
bet
wee
n va
riou
s m
otiv
atio
nal a
nd c
ogni
tive
fact
ors
mig
ht d
iffe
r ac
cord
ing
to g
ende
r: f
or g
irls
, onl
y le
arni
ng g
oals
wer
e re
late
d to
activ
e an
d ef
fect
ive
cogn
itive
eng
agem
ent,
whe
reas
als
o pe
rfor
man
ce g
oals
had
a so
mew
hat s
imila
r re
latio
n fo
r bo
ys. M
oreo
ver,
bot
h A
nder
man
and
You
ng
(199
4) a
nd N
olen
(19
88)
foun
d th
at g
irls
wer
e m
ore
incl
ined
to ta
sk o
r le
arn-
ing
goal
s, w
here
as b
oys
emph
asiz
ed m
ore
perf
orm
ance
goa
ls.
The
pre
sent
stu
dy w
as d
esig
ned
on th
e ba
sis
of th
e fr
amew
ork
and
resu
ltspr
esen
ted
abov
e. T
he p
urpo
se w
as to
fur
ther
exa
min
e ge
nder
dif
fere
nces
in in
-di
vidu
al f
acto
rs a
ffec
ting
self
-reg
ulat
ed le
arni
ng f
rom
a n
on-d
omai
n-sp
ecif
ic p
er-
spec
tive.
Acc
ordi
ngly
, the
two
mai
n re
sear
ch q
uest
ions
wer
e: 1
) A
re th
ere
any
gend
er d
iffe
renc
es in
dis
posi
tiona
l fac
tors
rel
ated
to s
elf-
regu
late
d le
arni
ng?
2)A
re th
ere
gend
er d
iffe
renc
es in
the
patte
rnin
g of
thes
e fa
ctor
s?
ME
TH
OD
Subj
ects
and
mea
sure
s
The
sam
ple
cons
iste
d of
628
sev
enth
-gra
ders
(29
5 gi
rls
and
333
boys
) fr
omsi
x ju
nior
hig
h sc
hool
s. S
tude
nts
resp
onde
d to
a s
elf-
repo
rt in
stru
men
t whi
chin
clud
ed s
ubsc
ales
for
goa
l ori
enta
tion,
per
ceiv
ed c
ontr
ol, g
loba
l sel
f-es
teem
,an
d le
arni
ng s
trat
egie
s. F
or m
easu
ring
goa
l ori
enta
tions
thre
e su
bsca
les
wer
ecr
eate
d. T
he s
cale
for
lear
ning
ori
enta
tion
cont
aine
d 12
item
s fo
r as
sess
ing
stu-
dent
s' f
ocus
on
lear
ning
(e.
g., "
I fe
el s
atis
fied
whe
n I
lear
n so
met
hing
new
insc
hool
"); t
he p
erfo
rman
ce o
rien
tatio
n sc
ale
incl
uded
11
item
s fo
r as
sess
ing
stu-
dent
s' a
bilit
y an
d ev
alua
tion
conc
erns
(e.
g., "
I fe
el s
atis
fied
whe
n I
do b
ette
r th
anot
her
stud
ents
"); a
nd th
e av
oida
nce
orie
ntat
ion
scal
e co
ntai
ned
8 ite
ms
for
asse
ss-
ing
stud
ents
' con
cern
s w
ith m
inim
izin
g ef
fort
(e.
g., "
I am
sat
isfi
ed w
hen
I do
n't
have
to w
ork
hard
in s
choo
l").
For
ass
essi
ng s
tude
nts'
per
ceiv
ed c
ontr
ol, a
n ac
tion-
theo
retic
al a
ppro
ach
was
use
d as
a f
ram
ewor
k (S
kinn
er, C
hapm
an &
Bal
tes
1988
; Ski
nner
, Wel
lbor
n &
Con
nell
1990
). A
ccor
ding
ly, p
erce
ived
con
trol
was
asse
ssed
mul
tidim
ensi
onal
ly b
y m
easu
ring
thre
e se
para
te c
onst
ruct
s. C
ontr
ol b
e-lie
fs w
ere
asse
ssed
usi
ng 8
item
s ta
ppin
g th
e ex
tent
to w
hich
stu
dent
s be
lieve
they
are
abl
e to
pro
duce
pos
itive
and
pre
vent
neg
ativ
e ou
tcom
es in
the
scho
oldo
mai
n (e
.g.,
"I c
an d
o w
ell i
n sc
hool
if I
wan
t to"
). M
eans
-end
s be
liefs
wer
e m
eas-
ured
usi
ng 1
5 ite
ms
to w
hich
stu
dent
s re
acte
d as
thre
e po
tent
ial m
eans
or
caus
es f
or s
ucce
ss a
nd f
ailu
re in
sch
ool:
a) e
ffor
t (5
item
s: e
.g.,
"You
lear
n in
scho
ol if
you
try
enou
gh")
, b)
abili
ty (
5 ite
ms:
"If
you
don
't le
arn
it is
bec
ause
you
are
not s
mar
t eno
ugh"
), a
nd c
) ex
tern
al (
5 ite
ms:
"If
you
do
wel
l in
scho
ol it
is b
ecau
seyo
u ar
e lu
cky"
). A
genc
y be
liefs
wer
e m
easu
red
in a
sim
ilar
man
ner
with
in tw
o ar
-ea
s of
inte
rest
: a)
effo
rt (
5 ite
ms:
e.g
., "I
try
hard
in s
choo
l"),
and
b)
abili
ty (
5
a
item
s: e
.g.,
"I h
ave
the
abili
ty to
lear
n in
sch
ool"
). S
elf-
este
em w
as d
efin
ed a
s in
di-
vidu
als'
gen
eral
sel
f-ac
cept
ance
or
thei
r ge
nera
l pos
itive
or
nega
tive
attit
udes
tow
ard
them
selv
es (
i.e.,
glob
al s
elf-
este
em).
The
mea
sure
men
t con
sist
ed o
f 11
cont
ext-
free
item
s (e
.g.,
"In
gene
ral,
I lik
e be
ing
the
way
I a
m")
. In
addi
tion,
the
ques
tionn
aire
als
o in
clud
ed 3
2 ite
ms
to a
sses
s st
uden
ts s
elf-
repo
rted
use
of
lear
ning
str
ateg
ies.
Ite
ms
wer
e se
lect
ed to
tap
stra
tegi
es th
at r
epre
sent
var
ious
dim
ensi
ons
of in
form
atio
n pr
oces
sing
; e.g
., el
abor
atio
n st
rate
gies
("W
hen
I st
udy
for
a te
st I
try
to tr
ansl
ate
the
mat
eria
l int
o m
y ow
n w
ords
"), s
elf-
mon
itori
ng s
trat
e-gi
es (
Whe
n st
udyi
ng f
or a
test
I o
ften
sto
p re
adin
g an
d as
k m
ysel
f qu
estio
ns to
see
if I
have
und
erst
ood
anyt
hing
"), p
lann
ing
(Whe
n I
stud
y fo
r a
test
I s
et c
lear
goa
ls f
or m
y-
self
), m
emor
izin
g ("
Whe
n I
stud
y fo
r a
test
I tr
y to
lear
n th
e m
ater
ial j
ust b
y sa
ying
to
mys
elf
over
and
ove
r")
etc.
Stu
dent
s ra
ted
each
item
on
a 7-
poin
t Lik
ert s
cale
rang
ing
from
tota
lly d
isag
ree
(1)
to to
tally
agr
ee (
7). G
PA w
as u
sed
as a
n in
dica
tor
of s
choo
l ach
ieve
men
t.
Ana
lyse
s
A s
erie
s of
fac
tor
anal
yses
was
use
d to
exa
min
e th
e st
ruct
ural
val
idity
of
the
mea
sure
men
ts. A
n an
alys
is o
n th
e m
otiv
atio
nal c
ompo
nent
s su
ppor
ted
the
pred
icte
d st
ruct
ure.
For
the
cogn
itive
com
pone
nts
(i.e
., le
arni
ng s
trat
egie
s) a
five
fac
tor
solu
tion
was
use
d to
for
m s
epar
ate
scal
es f
or c
ogni
tive-
mot
ivat
iona
lre
gula
tion
(CM
R),
rot
e-le
arni
ng, p
lann
ing,
det
ail m
emor
izin
g, a
nd e
labo
ratin
g(s
ee T
able
1 f
or d
escr
iptiv
e st
atis
tics;
cor
rela
tions
bet
wee
n al
l var
iabl
es a
re in
App
endi
x 1)
. Bot
h va
riab
le-o
rien
ted
and
patte
rn-o
rien
ted
appr
oach
es' w
ere
used
in a
naly
zing
gen
der
diff
eren
ces
acro
ss a
ll va
riab
les.
Zer
o-or
der
corr
elat
ions
and
AN
OV
As
wer
e us
ed to
exa
min
e ge
nder
dif
fere
nces
in s
epar
ate
mot
iva-
tiona
l and
cog
nitiv
e co
nstr
ucts
. Fur
ther
mor
e, s
epar
ate
clus
ter
anal
yses
for
gir
lsan
d bo
ys w
ere
used
in o
rder
to c
ateg
oriz
e st
uden
ts o
n th
e ba
sis
of d
iffe
rent
goa
lor
ient
atio
ns a
nd to
exa
min
e th
e pa
ttern
ing
of g
oals
and
rel
ated
var
iabl
es. F
i-na
lly, b
y us
ing
stru
ctur
al e
quat
ion
mod
elin
g, a
med
iatio
nal m
odel
in w
hich
goal
ori
enta
tions
wer
e as
sum
ed (
a) to
infl
uenc
e th
e se
lf-r
epor
ted
use
of le
arni
ng
2 In
var
iabl
oori
ente
d ap
proa
ch th
e co
ncep
tual
and
ana
lytic
al u
nit o
f an
alys
es is
the
vari
able
, and
the
focu
s of
inte
rest
is o
n m
ean
diff
eren
ces.
Pat
tern
-ori
ente
d ap
proa
ch, o
n th
e ot
her
hand
, fo-
cuse
s on
val
ue p
rofi
les
of in
divi
dual
s as
the
basi
c se
ts o
f in
form
atio
n (s
ee M
agnu
sson
et a
l. 19
91;
N ie
miv
irta
, 199
7).
stra
tegi
es a
nd s
ubse
quen
t sch
ool a
chie
vem
ent,
and
(b)
to m
edia
te th
e ef
fect
s of
vari
ous
self
-ref
eren
ced
belie
fs, w
as h
ypot
hesi
zed
and
test
ed.
Tab
le 1
. Des
crip
tive
Sta
tistic
s an
d R
elia
bilit
ies
Mea
sure
MS
D
Goa
l ori
enta
tions
Lea
rnin
g or
ient
atio
n5.
15.9
2.8
9Pe
rfor
man
ce o
rien
tatio
n4.
741.
03.8
5A
void
ance
ori
enta
tion
4.46
1.28
.88
Mea
ns-e
nds
belie
fs
Eff
ort
5.46
1.01
.73
Abi
lity
3.40
1.13
.69
Ext
erna
lt2.
511.
21.6
5A
genc
y be
liefs
Eff
ort
4.68
1.22
.80
Abi
lity
5.01
1.13
.83
Self
-est
eem
5.24
.98
.86
Con
trol
bel
iefs
5.54
.96
.83
Lea
rnin
g St
rate
gies
ttC
MR
.87
Rot
e-le
arni
ng.6
9Pl
anni
ng.8
0D
etai
l mem
oriz
ing
.87
Ela
bora
ting
.68
t tw
o ite
ms
wer
e ex
clud
ed o
n th
e ba
sis
of a
n ite
m a
naly
sis.
tr F
acto
r sc
ores
(M
=0,
SD
-1)
wer
e us
ed a
s th
eva
riab
les
for
lear
ning
str
ateg
ies.
Rel
iabi
litie
s ar
e m
ultip
le c
orre
latio
ns b
etw
een
the
estim
ated
fac
tor
scor
es a
ndth
e tr
ue f
acto
r va
lues
.
RE
SU
LTS
Gen
der
diff
eren
ces
in m
otiv
atio
n, le
arni
ng s
trat
egy
use,
and
ach
ieve
men
t
One
-way
ana
lysi
s of
var
ianc
e (A
NO
VA
) on
the
mot
ivat
iona
l var
iabl
es a
ndle
arni
ng s
trat
egie
s sh
ow th
at b
oys
scor
ed s
igni
fica
ntly
hig
her
than
gir
ls o
n pe
r-fo
rman
ce o
rien
tatio
n (p
<.0
01),
avo
idan
ce o
rien
tatio
n (p
<.0
01),
mea
ns-e
nds
be-
liefs
of
abili
ty (
p<.0
5), a
genc
y be
liefs
of
abili
ty (
p<.0
5), s
elf-
este
em (
p<.0
01),
rot
e-le
arni
ng s
trat
egie
s (p
<.0
1), a
nd d
etai
l mem
oriz
ing
(p<
.01)
. In
cont
rast
, gir
ls h
adhi
gher
GPA
s (p
<.0
01).
Sep
arat
e ze
ro-o
rder
cor
rela
tions
bet
wee
n m
otiv
atio
nal
vari
able
s an
d le
arni
ng s
trat
egie
s, a
nd a
chie
vem
ent w
ere
calc
ulat
ed in
ord
er to
exam
ine
if th
e m
agni
tude
of
rela
tions
var
ied
by g
ende
r (T
able
2).
Mos
t of
the
mot
ivat
iona
l var
iabl
es a
nd le
arni
ng s
trat
egie
s w
ere
sign
ific
antly
rel
ated
to o
ver-
all s
choo
l ach
ieve
men
t. St
rong
est c
orre
latio
ns w
ere
obta
ined
bet
wee
n se
lf-
rela
ted
belie
fs a
nd d
eep
proc
essi
ng s
trat
egie
s (c
ogni
tive-
mot
ivat
iona
l reg
ulat
ion
and
elab
orat
ing,
res
pect
ivel
y) a
nd G
PA. H
owev
er, n
o si
gnif
ican
t dif
fere
nces
inth
e m
agni
tude
s of
cor
rela
tions
bet
wee
n bo
ys a
nd g
irls
wer
e fo
und.
Tab
le 2
. Cor
rela
tions
Bet
wee
n M
otiv
atio
n an
d Le
arni
ng S
trat
egie
s w
ith G
PA
by
Gen
der
Mea
sure
Boy
s (G
PA
)G
irls
(GM
)
Goa
l ori
enta
tions
Lea
rnin
g or
ient
atio
n.1
6**
.25
"Pe
rfor
man
ce o
rien
tatio
n.0
3.1
0A
void
ance
ori
enta
tion
-.17
*-.
14
Mea
ns-e
nds
belie
fs
Eff
ort
.05
.08
Abi
lity
-.18
**-.
28**
Ext
erna
l-.
30**
-.38
**
Age
ncy
belie
fs
Eff
ort
.46
**.3
2"
Abi
lity
.57
**.5
3**
Self
-est
eem
.38
**.3
5**
Con
trol
bel
iefs
.36
**.4
3**
Lea
rnin
g St
rate
gies
CM
R.3
4**
.29
**
Rot
e-le
arni
ng-.
21**
-.20
**
Plan
ning
-.04
-.05
Det
ail m
emor
izin
g.0
3-.
05
Ela
bora
ting
.19
**.3
2**
Not
e.' p
<.0
5; "
p<.0
1.
Gen
der
diff
eren
ces
in g
oal p
atte
rns
Sepa
rate
K-M
eans
clu
ster
ana
lyse
s fo
r bo
ys a
nd g
irls
wer
e us
ed to
gro
up s
tu-
dent
s on
the
basi
s of
thei
r sc
ores
on
goal
ori
enta
tions
. Fol
low
ing
the
theo
retic
alfr
amew
ork
both
sol
utio
ns w
ere
forc
ed to
incl
ude
thre
e gr
oups
. The
pat
tern
ing
of g
oal o
rien
tatio
ns w
ere
very
sim
ilar
in b
oth
grou
ps (
see
Tab
le 3
). O
n th
e ba
sis
of th
e m
ost d
omin
ant g
oal o
rien
tatio
n in
eac
h gr
oup
clus
ters
wer
e la
bele
d as
lear
ning
ori
ente
d (N
g=10
5; N
b=10
4), p
erfo
rman
ce o
rien
ted
(Ng=
105;
Nb=
140)
,an
d av
oida
nce
orie
nted
(N
g=85
; Nb=
89),
res
pect
ivel
y. I
n or
der
to e
xam
ine
the
valid
ity o
f th
e gr
oupi
ng, a
nd to
fin
d ou
t in
deta
il ho
w th
e gr
oups
dif
fere
d ac
ross
11
othe
r m
otiv
atio
nal a
nd c
ogni
tive
mea
sure
s, a
n A
NO
VA
was
per
form
ed (
Tab
le4)
.
Tab
le 3
. Gro
up D
iffer
ence
s on
Goa
l Orie
ntat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Goa
l orie
ntat
ion
Lear
ning
Per
form
ance
Avo
idan
ce
MSD
MS
DM
SD
Boy
sL
earn
ing
orie
ntat
ion
5.80
'.5
75.
41'
.61
4.20
'.6
1Pe
rfor
man
ce o
rien
tatio
n4.
54'
.91
5.71
'.5
54.
25.6
7A
void
ance
ori
enta
tion
3.31
ab.7
15.
24'
.86
5.18
6.9
0G
irls
Lea
rnin
g or
ient
atio
n5.
96'
.58
4.89
'.7
44.
25'
.71
Perf
orm
ance
ori
enta
tion
4.40
'1.
035.
33'
.60
3.62
°.6
2A
void
ance
ori
enta
tion
2.95
'.7
95.
13'
.90
4.85
'1.
00
'Mea
ns w
ith s
ame
lette
rs a
re s
igni
fica
ntly
dif
fere
nt a
t the
.05
leve
l (St
uden
t-N
ewm
an-K
euls
-te
st).
Tab
le 4
. Gro
up D
iffer
ence
s in
Mot
ivat
ion
and
Lear
ning
Str
ateg
ies
Boy
sG
irls
Mea
sure
LOP
OA
OLO
PO
AO
Mea
ns-e
nds
belie
fsE
ffor
t5.
66 '
5.83
b4.
88 '1
35.
75 '
5.42
'4.
92 '
Abi
lity
3.19
'3.
71'
3.55
2.86
'3.
70'
3.28
'E
xter
nal
L96
'2.
68 '
3.12
'L
932.
62 '
2.86
bA
genc
y be
liefs
Eff
ort
5.28
'4.
67'
3.95
'5.
54'
4.42
'3.
96'
Abi
lity
5.38
5.20
b4.
62 'b
5.51
4.83
'4.
28Se
lf-e
stee
m5.
72'
5.39
'4.
94'
5.60
4.86
'4.
76 b
Con
trol
bel
iefs
5.81
'5.
78 b
4.98
6.04
5.50
'4.
81L
earn
ing
Stra
tegi
es
CM
R.4
3 °
.00
'-.
72 '
.68
-.08
'-.
51 °
Rot
e-le
arni
ng-.
25.3
9 '
°-.
52 a
.25
'-.
00 '
Plan
ning
.36
'-.
04-.
47 '
.58
`b-.
17 a
-.40
bD
etai
l mem
oriz
ing
.19
°32
bab
.11
a49
b..4
2 ab
Ela
bora
ting
.22°
-.12
b-.
52"
.38'
.02
-.42
'G
PA8.
057.
90 b
7.63
8.39
'8.
28 b
8.03
Mea
ns w
ith s
ame
lette
rs a
re s
igni
fica
ntly
dif
fere
nt a
t the
.05
leve
l (St
uden
t-N
ewm
an-K
euls
-te
st).
CM
RC
ogni
tive-
mot
ivat
iona
l reg
ulat
ion;
LO
=L
eam
ing
orie
nted
; PO
= P
erfo
rman
ce o
rien
ted;
AO
=A
void
ance
ori
-en
ted.
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
12
Sim
ilar
effe
cts
wer
e fo
und
for
both
boy
s an
d gi
rls
(see
Fig
ures
1 a
nd 2
for
il-
lust
rativ
e pr
ofile
s). A
void
ance
ori
ente
d st
uden
ts d
istin
guis
hed
clea
rly
from
othe
r gr
oups
by
the
fact
that
thei
r se
lf-p
erce
ptio
ns w
ere
rela
tivel
y lo
w. T
hey
also
repo
rted
usi
ng s
igni
fica
ntly
less
hig
her
orde
r le
arni
ng s
trat
egie
s th
an o
ther
s.L
earn
ing
orie
nted
stu
dent
s, in
con
tras
t, ha
d hi
gh s
core
s on
eff
ort-
rela
ted
agen
cy b
elie
fs a
nd s
elf-
este
em. T
hey
also
end
orse
d de
ep p
roce
ssin
g st
rate
gies
end
effo
rt-r
elat
ed m
eans
-end
s be
liefs
. Sim
ilarl
y, p
erfo
rman
ce o
rien
ted
stud
ents
emph
asiz
ed e
ffor
t, bu
t in
addi
tion,
they
als
o ha
d hi
gher
sco
res
in a
bilit
y-re
late
dm
eans
-end
s be
liefs
. Fur
ther
mor
e, th
ey a
lso
endo
rsed
rot
e le
arni
ng a
nd d
etai
lm
emor
izin
g. I
n su
m, t
he p
atte
rnin
g of
var
ious
mea
sure
s cl
earl
y su
ppor
ted
the
pred
icte
d m
otiv
atio
nal-
cogn
itive
pro
file
s of
stu
dent
s w
ith d
iffe
rent
app
roac
hes
to le
arni
ng. T
o fu
rthe
r ex
amin
e th
e si
mila
rity
of
mot
ivat
iona
l pro
file
s w
ithin
goal
gro
ups,
a s
erie
s of
t-te
sts
was
per
form
ed w
ithin
cor
resp
ondi
ng g
oal g
roup
s(T
able
5).
Alth
ough
the
few
dif
fere
nces
fou
nd w
ere
sim
ilar
to th
ose
of th
e ov
er-
all c
ompa
riso
n, s
ome
inte
rest
ing
effe
cts
emer
ged:
per
form
ance
ori
ente
d bo
ysdi
ffer
ed f
rom
per
form
ance
ori
ente
d gi
rls
clea
rly
in th
at th
ey s
core
d si
gnif
ican
tlyhi
gher
on
lear
ning
ori
enta
tion
(p<
.01)
, per
form
ance
ori
enta
tion
(p<
.01)
, eff
ort-
rela
ted
mea
ns-e
nds
belie
fs (
p<.0
1), a
nd s
elf-
este
em. I
n ad
ditio
n, p
erfo
rman
ceor
ient
ed b
oys
endo
rsed
hig
her
leve
l of
deta
il m
emor
izin
g co
mpa
red
to g
irls
(p<
.01)
. Lea
rnin
g or
ient
ed g
irls
, ins
tead
, rep
orte
d us
ing
sign
ific
antly
(p.
<05
)m
ore
deep
er le
vel l
earn
ing
stra
tegi
es th
an le
arni
ng o
rien
ted
boys
.
Fig
ure
1. M
otiv
atio
nal p
rofil
es (
z-sc
ores
) In
diff
eren
t goa
l gro
up (
girls
)
I
-0-
Lear
ning
-C
I- P
erfo
rman
ce -
IN-
Avo
idan
ce
Fig
ure
2. M
otiv
atio
nal p
rofil
es (
z-sc
ores
) in
diff
eren
t goa
l gro
up (
boys
)
Tab
le 5
. Gen
der
Diff
eren
ces
in M
otiv
atio
n an
d Le
arni
ng S
trat
egie
s
Mea
sure
Lea
rnin
gPe
rfor
man
ceA
void
ance
Gir
lsB
oys
Gir
lsB
oys
Gir
lsB
oys
Goa
l ori
enta
tion
Lea
rnin
g or
ient
atio
n5.
965.
80 *
4.89
5.41
**
4.25
4.20
*
Perf
orm
ance
ori
enta
tion
4.40
4.54
5.33
5.71
"3.
624.
25 *
*
Avo
idan
ce o
rien
tatio
n2.
953.
31 *
*5.
135.
244.
855.
18
Mea
ns.e
nds
belie
fs
Eff
ort
5.75
5.66
5.43
5.83
**
4.92
4.88
Abi
lity
2.86
3.19
*3.
703.
713.
283.
55E
xter
nal
1.93
1.96
2.62
2.68
2.86
3.12
Age
ncy
belie
fsE
ffor
t5.
545.
284.
424.
673.
963.
95
Abi
lity
5.51
5.38
4.83
5.20
4.28
4.62
*
Se lf
este
em5.
605.
724.
865.
39 *
*4.
764.
94
Con
trol
bel
iefs
6.04
5.81
*5.
505.
78 *
4.81
4.98
Lea
rnin
g St
rate
gies
CM
R.6
8.4
3 *
-.08
.00
-.51
-.72
Rot
e-le
arni
ng-.
52-.
25 *
.25
.39
-.00
-.01
Plan
ning
.58
.36
-.17
-.04
-.40
-.47
Det
ail m
emor
izin
g.1
1.1
9-.
09.3
2 **
-.42
-.34
Ela
bora
ting
.38
.22
.02
-.12
-.42
-.52
GPA
8.39
8.05
**
8.28
7.90
**
8.03
7.63
**
RE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
SEM
-mod
els
of m
otiv
atio
nal a
nd c
ogni
tive
fact
ors
pred
ictin
g sc
hool
ach
ieve
men
t
Usi
ng s
truc
tura
l equ
atio
n m
odel
ing,
sim
ilar
med
iatio
nal m
odel
s in
whi
chgo
al o
rien
tatio
ns w
ere
assu
med
(a)
to in
flue
nce
the
self
-rep
orte
d us
e of
lear
ning
stra
tegi
es a
nd s
ubse
quen
t sch
ool a
chie
vem
ent',
and
(b)
to m
edia
te th
e ef
fect
s of
vari
ous
self
-ref
eren
ced
belie
fs, w
ere
cons
truc
ted
and
test
ed f
or b
oth
boys
and
girl
s. I
tem
par
cels
wer
e us
ed a
s in
dica
tors
of
late
nt v
aria
bles
, and
cov
aria
nce
mat
rixe
s w
ere
used
as
the
basi
s fo
r th
e an
alys
is.
A b
asel
ine
mod
el f
or th
e w
hole
sam
ple
was
spe
cifi
ed in
whi
ch th
e ef
fect
s of
mea
ns-e
nds
belie
fs w
ere
indi
rect
in n
atur
e. T
hey
wer
e m
edia
ted
by m
easu
res
ofgo
al o
rien
tatio
ns, w
hich
in tu
rn w
ere
med
iate
d by
lear
ning
str
ateg
ies.
4 T
hus,
di-
rect
pat
hs w
ere
estim
ated
fro
m m
eans
-end
s be
liefs
to g
oal o
rien
tatio
ns; f
rom
goal
ori
enta
tions
to le
arni
ng s
trat
egie
s; a
nd f
rom
lear
ning
str
ateg
ies
to s
choo
lac
hiev
emen
t. T
he b
asel
ine
mod
el f
itted
the
data
wel
l (T
able
6).
Sig
nifi
cant
ef-
fect
s in
the
mod
el a
re il
lust
rate
d in
Fig
ure
3.T
he n
ext s
tep
was
to te
st th
e in
vari
ance
(i.e
., eq
ualit
y) o
f es
timat
es b
etw
een
boys
and
gir
ls. T
he b
est f
ittin
g m
odel
(se
e T
able
6)
was
est
imat
ed w
ith f
ree
pa-
ram
eter
s on
bot
h m
easu
rem
ent m
odel
s (e
.g.,
load
ings
on
late
nt v
aria
bles
) an
dst
ruct
ural
mod
els
(e.g
., pa
th c
oeff
icie
nts)
. Som
e m
inor
dif
fere
nces
bet
wee
nsu
bmod
els
for
boys
and
gir
ls w
ere
foun
d. U
nlik
e bo
ys, g
irls
had
sig
nifi
cant
ef-
fect
s fr
om a
bilit
y-re
late
d m
eans
-end
s be
liefs
to p
erfo
rman
ce o
rien
tatio
n, a
ndfr
om p
erfo
rman
ce o
rien
tatio
n to
sur
face
pro
cess
ing.
Boy
s in
stea
d ha
d an
add
i-tio
nal e
ffec
t fro
m le
arni
ng o
rien
tatio
n to
sur
face
pro
cess
ing,
and
a s
igni
fica
nt(n
egat
ive)
eff
ect f
rom
sur
face
pro
cess
ing
to G
PA (
Figu
res
4 an
d 5)
.
Tab
le 6
. Goo
dnes
s-of
-Fit
Inde
xes
for
Est
imat
ed S
EM
-Mod
els
Goa
l ori
enta
tion
X2
dfX
2/ d
fO
FTN
NFI
IFI
RM
S
Bas
elin
e m
odel
(to
tal s
ampl
e)21
9.06
962.
28.9
5.9
4.9
60.
05Si
mul
tane
ous
mod
el33
6.58
192
1.75
.91
.94
.96
0.05
Goo
dnes
-of-
Fit I
ndex
(Jo
resk
og &
Sor
bom
, 198
9); N
NFI
Non
-Nor
med
Fit
Inde
x (B
ende
r, 1
990)
; IFI
- In
crem
enta
l Fit
Inde
x (B
olle
n, 1
989)
. RM
S -
Roo
t Mea
n Sq
uare
.
3A
gra
de-p
oint
-ave
rage
mea
sure
d at
the
end
of 7
th g
rade
was
use
d as
an
indi
cato
r of
sch
ool p
er-
form
ance
.
4T
o ac
hiev
e a
grea
ter
sim
plic
ity in
the
com
plex
mod
el, a
ll fi
ve s
cale
s fo
r le
arni
ng s
trat
egie
s w
ere
aggr
egat
ed in
to tw
o hi
gher
ord
er f
acto
rs: d
eep
and
surf
ace
proc
essi
ng, r
espe
ctiv
ely.
-.31
.ds
Mea
ns-
Effo
rt
Mea
ns-
Abi
lity
Mea
ns-
Ext
erna
l
41 .36
-.35 .4
7
-.21
Sur
face
proc
essi
ng
Fig
ure
3. A
SE
M-m
odel
of m
otiv
atio
nal a
nd c
ogni
tive
fact
ors
pred
ictin
g sc
hool
ach
ieve
men
t(t
otal
sam
ple)
. (S
olid
line
s re
pres
ent s
igni
fican
t effe
cts
(p<
.05]
.)
-.34
Mea
ns-
Effo
rt
Mea
ns-
Abi
lity
Mea
ns-
Ext
erna
l
Fig
ure
4. A
SE
M-m
odel
of m
otiv
atio
nal a
nd c
ogni
tive
fact
ors
pred
ictin
g sc
hool
ach
ieve
men
t(b
oys)
. (S
olid
line
s re
pres
ent s
igni
fican
t effe
cts
[p<
.05]
, dot
ted
line
[ p<
.10]
).
1516
1-.2
0
Mea
ns-
Effo
rt
Mea
ns-
Abi
lity
Dee
ppr
oces
sing
Mea
ns-
Ext
erna
l
-37
CP
A)
Fig
ure
5. A
SE
M-m
odel
of m
otiv
atio
nal a
nd c
ogni
tive
fact
ors
pred
ictin
g sc
hool
ach
ieve
men
t(g
irls)
. (S
olid
line
s re
pres
ent s
igni
fican
t effe
cts
[p<
.05]
.)
DIS
CU
SS
ION
AN
D C
ON
CLU
SIO
NS
The
pur
pose
of
the
stud
y w
as to
exa
min
e ge
nder
dif
fere
nces
in v
ario
us m
o-tiv
atio
nal a
nd c
ogni
tive
vari
able
s re
late
d to
sel
f-re
gula
ted
lear
ning
. A d
ispo
si-
tiona
l app
roac
h to
mot
ivat
ion
was
ado
pted
in o
rder
to e
xam
ine
indi
vidu
al d
if-
fere
nces
at a
gen
eral
(i.e
., no
n-do
mai
n-sp
ecif
ic)
leve
l. T
he th
eore
tical
rat
iona
lew
as b
ased
on
rece
nt r
esea
rch
on s
elf-
regu
late
d le
arni
ng. I
t was
ass
umed
that
the
belie
fs s
tude
nts
hold
abo
ut th
emse
lves
and
lear
ning
wou
ld a
ffec
t the
way
stu
-de
nts
appr
oach
and
eng
age
in le
arni
ng s
ituat
ions
, and
fur
ther
mor
e, th
at th
ese
sets
of
belie
fs w
ould
res
ult i
n di
ffer
ent m
otiv
atio
nal p
rofi
les.
In g
ener
al, t
he r
esul
ts w
ere
cons
iste
nt w
ith p
revi
ous
rese
arch
. Rel
atio
nsfo
und
betw
een
mot
ivat
iona
l fac
tors
and
lear
ning
str
ateg
ies
conf
orm
ed to
the
find
ings
of
othe
r st
udie
s (e
.g.,
Am
es &
Arc
her,
198
8; M
eece
, Blu
men
feld
&H
oyle
, 198
8; N
olen
, 198
8; P
intr
ich
& D
e G
root
, 199
0). F
or e
xam
ple,
lear
ning
focu
sed
goal
s w
ere
rela
ted
to c
ontr
ol b
elie
fs, s
elf-
este
em, a
nd d
eep
proc
essi
ngst
rate
gies
, whe
reas
avo
idan
ce o
rien
tatio
n ha
d si
gnif
ican
t neg
ativ
e re
latio
ns w
ithse
lf-r
elat
ed b
elie
fs a
nd a
ctiv
e en
gage
men
t in
lear
ning
. Per
form
ance
ori
enta
tion,
inst
ead,
was
ass
ocia
ted
with
abi
lity-
rela
ted
mea
ns-e
nds
belie
fs a
nd a
pre
fere
nce
17
for
surf
ace
stra
tegi
es in
dica
ting
a so
mew
hat m
ore
abili
ty a
nd o
utco
me-
focu
sed
aspe
ct o
f le
arni
ng a
ctiv
ity.
Res
ults
con
cern
ing
gend
er d
iffe
renc
es p
rovi
de n
ew e
vide
nce
agai
nst t
he a
s-su
mpt
ion
of g
irls
ado
ptin
g a
supe
rfic
ial a
ppro
ach
to le
arni
ng. A
lthou
gh b
oys
had
high
sel
f-co
nfid
ence
and
pos
itive
sel
f-pe
rcep
tions
, the
y w
ere
sign
ific
antly
mor
e in
clin
ed to
per
form
ance
goa
ls a
nd r
epor
ted
usin
g m
ore
surf
ace
leve
lle
arni
ng s
trat
egie
s (i
.e.,
rote
-lea
rnin
g an
d de
tail
mem
oriz
ing)
than
gir
ls. M
otiv
a-tio
nal p
rofi
les
per
se w
ere
very
sim
ilar
for
both
gen
der,
but
indi
catio
ns o
f so
me
min
or d
iffe
renc
es w
ere
dete
cted
. For
exa
mpl
e, a
lthou
gh th
e go
al p
atte
rns
(i.e
.,re
lativ
e va
lue
prof
iles)
for
per
form
ance
ori
ente
d st
uden
ts w
ere
high
ly s
imila
r,bo
ys h
ad s
igni
fica
ntly
hig
her
scor
es in
eff
ort-
rela
ted
mea
ns-e
nds
belie
fs a
nd r
e-po
rted
use
of
supe
rfic
ial l
earn
ing
stra
tegi
es. T
hese
dif
fere
nces
mig
ht in
dica
teth
at a
per
form
ance
ori
ente
d en
gage
men
t rep
rese
nts
a so
mew
hat m
ore
activ
ean
d ou
tcom
e-fo
cuse
d ap
proa
ch to
lear
ning
for
boy
s th
an f
or g
irls
. In
othe
rw
ords
, for
boy
s, a
per
form
ance
ori
ente
d ac
tivity
in th
e cl
assr
oom
mig
ht e
xem
-pl
ify
a co
nven
ient
way
of
dem
onst
ratin
g co
mpe
tenc
e an
d ga
inin
g at
tent
ion
from
pee
rs. T
his
form
of
self
-enh
anci
ng b
ehav
ior
espe
cial
ly f
or m
ales
is in
agre
emen
t with
res
earc
h co
ncer
ning
the
use
of s
elf-
pres
enta
tiona
l str
ateg
ies
(for
a re
view
, see
Ban
aji &
Pre
ntic
e, 1
994)
. Thi
s as
sum
ptio
n of
som
ewha
t dif
fere
ntm
echa
nism
s an
d m
otiv
es u
nder
lyin
g pe
rfor
man
ce o
rien
tatio
n fo
r bo
ys a
nd g
irls
was
par
tially
sup
port
ed b
y hy
poth
etic
al c
ausa
l mod
els.
How
ever
, the
exp
lana
-to
ry p
ower
of
thes
e m
odel
s w
ere
only
mod
erat
e, s
o th
e re
sults
sho
uld
be in
ter-
pret
ed w
ith c
are.
In s
um, r
esul
ts o
btai
ned
in th
e pr
esen
t stu
dy h
ave
impl
icat
ions
for
bot
h th
ere
sear
ch o
n se
lf-r
egul
ated
lear
ning
in g
ener
al a
nd g
ende
r di
ffer
ence
s in
par
ticu-
lar.
The
min
or b
ut s
yste
mat
ic d
iffe
renc
es f
ound
bet
wee
n bo
ys' a
nd g
irls
' mot
i-va
tiona
l ori
enta
tions
poi
nt o
ut th
e so
cial
(or
soc
ializ
ed)
natu
re o
f th
e co
re b
e-lie
fs s
tude
nts
hold
abo
ut th
emse
lves
. In
the
cour
se o
f de
velo
pmen
t ind
ivid
uals
crea
te s
tand
ards
for
thei
r be
havi
ors
mos
tly o
n th
e ba
sis
of s
ocia
l fee
dbac
k(B
andu
ra, 1
986)
. Thu
s, r
esul
ts s
ugge
stin
g th
at b
oys
emph
asiz
e pe
rfor
man
ce a
ndou
tcom
es a
s in
dica
tions
of
succ
ess
(at l
east
in r
elat
ion
to s
choo
l) m
ore
than
girl
s m
ight
act
ually
illu
stra
te th
eir
diff
eren
t way
s of
cop
ing
with
soc
ial p
ress
ure
and
perc
eivi
ng e
nvir
onm
enta
l exp
ecta
tions
.T
his
stud
y al
so d
emon
stra
te h
ow s
tude
nts
pred
ispo
sitio
ns to
var
ious
for
ms
of s
elf-
regu
lato
ry a
ctiv
ity h
ave
solid
gro
unds
in in
divi
dual
goa
ls a
nd m
otiv
a-tio
nal b
elie
fs. T
hat i
s, th
e be
liefs
stu
dent
s ho
ld p
rovi
de a
gui
danc
e fo
r th
e
Ig
cour
se o
f ac
tions
they
pre
pare
to c
arry
out
in v
ario
us s
ituat
ions
. It i
s th
eref
ore
impo
rtan
t to
real
ize
that
indi
vidu
al s
elf-
regu
latio
n al
way
s st
ems
from
per
sona
lre
spon
ses
to e
nvir
onm
enta
l and
situ
atio
nal d
eman
ds. S
elf-
regu
lato
ry a
ctio
ns a
reno
t be
unde
rsto
od o
nly
as s
ome
effe
ctiv
e fo
rms
of e
ngag
emen
t, bu
t as
vari
ous
form
s of
ada
ptiv
e ac
tivity
that
hel
p to
mai
ntai
n pe
rson
al p
sych
olog
ical
wel
l-be
ing
(cf.
Boe
kaer
ts, 1
996)
.M
otiv
atio
nal a
nd c
ogni
tive
dete
rmin
ants
of
lear
ning
and
thei
r un
derl
ying
mec
hani
sms
in g
ener
al a
re o
f ce
ntra
l int
eres
t in
curr
ent r
esea
rch.
How
ever
, it i
sal
so e
vide
nt th
at v
ario
us c
ultu
ral a
nd c
onte
xtua
l fac
tors
aff
ectin
g it
shou
ld a
lso
be c
onsi
dere
d. T
his
stud
y, c
onsi
deri
ng g
ende
r di
ffer
ence
s, is
a m
odes
t atte
mpt
to s
triv
e to
war
ds th
is g
oal.
At a
gen
eral
leve
l, th
e re
sults
pro
vide
impo
rtan
tcr
oss-
cultu
ral i
nfor
mat
ion
for
the
ongo
ing
rese
arch
on
both
mot
ivat
ion
and
self
-reg
ulat
ed le
arni
ng, a
nd g
ende
r di
ffer
ence
s. H
owev
er, i
n or
der
to f
ully
cap
-tu
re th
e dy
nam
ics
and
deve
lopm
enta
l nat
ure
of th
ese
phen
omen
a, f
utur
e re
-se
arch
sho
uld
focu
s on
act
iviti
es a
nd p
roce
sses
that
occ
ur in
nat
ural
lear
ning
situ
atio
ns.
RE
FE
RE
NC
ES
Am
es, C
. & A
rche
r, J
. (19
88).
Ach
ieve
men
t goa
ls in
the
clas
sroo
m: S
tude
nt le
arni
ng s
trat
egie
san
d m
otiv
atio
nal p
roce
sses
. Jou
rnal
of
Edu
catio
nal P
sych
olog
y, 8
0, 2
60.2
67.
Am
es, C
. (19
92).
Cla
ssro
oms:
goa
ls, s
truc
ture
s, a
nd s
tude
nt m
otiv
atio
n. J
ourn
al o
f E
duca
tiona
l Psy
-
chol
ogy,
84,
261
-271
.A
nder
man
, E. M
. & Y
oung
, A. J
. (19
94).
Mot
ivat
ion
and
stra
tegy
use
in s
cien
ce :I
ndiv
idua
l dif
-fe
renc
es a
nd c
lass
room
eff
ects
. Jou
rnal
of
Res
earc
h in
Sci
ence
Tea
chin
g. 8
, 811
-831
.
Ban
aji,
M. R
. & P
rent
ice,
D. A
. (19
94).
The
sel
f in
soc
ial c
onte
xts.
Ann
ual R
evie
w o
f Ps
ycho
logy
, 45,
297-
332.
Ban
dura
, A. (
1986
). S
ocia
l fou
ndat
ions
of
thou
ght a
nd a
ctio
n: A
soc
ial c
ogni
tive
theo
ry. E
ngle
woo
d
Clif
f, N
J: P
rent
ice-
Hal
l.B
enbo
w, C
. & S
tanl
ey, J
. (19
82).
Con
sequ
ence
s in
hig
h sc
hool
and
col
lege
of
sex
diff
eren
ces
inm
athe
mat
ical
rea
soni
ng a
bilit
y: A
long
itudi
nal p
ersp
ectiv
e. A
mer
ican
Edu
catio
nal R
esea
rch
Jour
nal,
4, 5
98-6
22.
Ben
der,
P. M
. (19
90).
Fit
inde
xes,
lagr
ange
mul
tiplie
rs, c
onst
rain
t cha
nges
and
inco
mpl
ete
data
inst
ruct
ural
mod
els.
Mul
tivar
iate
Beh
avio
ral R
esea
rch,
25(
2), 1
63-1
73.
Bey
er, S
. & B
owde
n, E
. M. (
in p
ress
). G
ende
r di
ffer
ence
s in
sel
f-pe
rcep
tions
: Con
verg
ent e
vi-
denc
e fr
om th
ree
mea
sure
s of
acc
urac
y an
d bi
as. P
erso
nalit
y an
d So
cial
Psy
chol
ogy
Bul
letin
.B
ohlin
, C. F
. (19
94).
Lea
rnin
g st
yle
fact
ors
and
mat
hem
atic
s pe
rfor
man
ce: S
ex-r
elat
ed d
iffe
renc
es.
Inte
rnat
iona
l Jou
rnal
of
Edu
catio
nal R
esea
rch,
4, 3
87-3
98.
Bol
len,
K. A
. (19
89).
Str
uctu
ral e
quat
ions
with
late
nt v
aria
bles
. New
Yor
k: J
ohn
Wile
y &
Son
s.
Boe
kaer
ts, M
. (19
93).
Bei
ng c
once
rned
with
wel
l-be
ing
and
with
lear
ning
. Edu
catio
nal P
sych
olog
ist,
28, 1
49-1
67.
Boe
kaer
ts, M
. (19
96).
Sel
f-re
gula
ted
lear
ning
at t
he ju
nctio
n of
cog
nitio
n an
d m
otiv
atio
n. E
uro-
pean
Psy
chol
ogis
t, 1,
100
-112
.B
ouff
ard,
T.,
Boi
sver
t, J.
, Vez
eau,
C. &
Lar
ouch
e, C
. (19
95).
The
impa
ct o
f go
al o
rien
tatio
n on
self
-reg
ulat
ion
and
perf
orm
ance
am
ong
colle
ge s
tude
nts.
Bri
tish
Jour
nal o
f E
duca
tiona
l Psy
chot
ogy,
65,
317
-329
.C
arve
r, C
. S. &
Sch
eier
, M. F
. (19
91).
Sel
f-re
gula
tion
and
the
self
. In
Stra
uss,
J. &
Goe
thal
s, G
.R
. (ed
s.):
The
sel
f: I
nter
disc
iplin
ary
appr
oach
es. N
Y: S
prin
ger-
Ver
lag.
Cov
ingt
on, M
. V. (
1992
). M
akin
g th
e gr
ade.
A s
elfw
orth
per
spec
tive
on m
otiv
atio
n an
d sc
hool
ref
orm
.C
ambr
idge
Uni
vers
ity P
ress
.D
iene
r, C
. I. &
Dw
eck,
C. S
. (19
78).
An
anal
ysis
of
lear
ned
help
less
ness
: Con
tinuo
us c
hang
es in
perf
orm
ance
, str
ateg
y an
d ac
hiev
emen
t cog
nitio
ns f
ollo
win
g fa
ilure
. Jou
rnal
of
Pers
onal
ity a
nd
Soci
al P
sych
olog
y, 3
6, 4
51.4
62.
Dw
eck,
C. S
. & B
empe
chat
, J. (
1983
). C
hild
ren'
s th
eori
es o
f in
telli
genc
e: C
onse
quen
ces
for
lear
ning
. In
Pari
s, S
. G.,
Ols
on, G
. M. &
Ste
vens
on, H
. W. (
eds.
) L
earn
ing
and
Mot
ivat
ion
inth
e C
lass
room
. Hill
sdal
e, N
J: E
rlba
um.
Dw
eck,
C. S
. & L
egge
tt, E
. L. (
1988
). A
soc
ial-
cogn
itive
app
roac
h to
mot
ivat
ion
and
pers
onal
ity.
Psyc
holo
gica
l Rev
iew
, 95,
256
-273
.
Ecc
les,
J. S
. (19
85).
Sex
dif
fere
nces
in a
chie
vem
ent p
atte
rns.
In
T. S
onde
regg
er (
ed.)
Neb
rask
aSy
mpo
sium
of
Mot
ivat
ion,
Vol
. 32.
Lin
coln
, NE
: Uni
vers
ity o
f N
ebra
ska
Pres
s.E
ccle
s-Pa
rson
s, J
., A
dler
, T. F
. & K
acza
la, C
. M. (
1982
). S
ocia
lizat
ion
of a
chie
vem
ent a
ttitu
des
and
belie
fs: P
aren
tal i
nflu
ence
s. C
hild
Dev
elop
men
t, 53
, 310
.321
.E
lliot
, A. J
. & H
arac
kiew
icz,
J. M
. (19
96).
App
roac
h an
d av
oida
nce
achi
evem
ent g
oals
and
intr
insi
cm
otiv
atio
n: A
med
iato
nal a
naly
sis.
Jou
rnal
of
Pers
onal
ity a
nd S
ocia
l Psy
chol
ogy,
70,
461
-475
.E
man
uels
son,
I. &
Fis
chbe
in, S
. (19
86).
Viv
e la
dif
fere
nce?
A s
tudy
on
sex
and
scho
olin
g. S
cand
i-na
vian
Jou
rnal
of
Edu
catio
nal R
esea
rch,
2, 7
1-84
.Fe
nnem
a, E
. Pet
erso
n, P
. (19
85).
Aut
onom
ous
lear
ning
beh
avio
r: A
pos
sibl
e ex
plan
atio
n of
gen
-de
r-re
late
d di
ffer
ence
s in
mat
hem
atic
s. I
n L
C. W
ilkin
son
& C
. B. M
arre
tt (e
ds.)
Gen
der
in-
flue
nces
in c
lass
room
inte
ract
ion.
Orl
ando
, FL
Aca
dem
ic P
ress
.G
arci
a, T
. (19
95).
The
Rol
e of
Mot
ivat
iona
l Str
ateg
ies
in S
elf-
Reg
ulat
ed L
earn
ing.
In
P. R
. Pin
-tr
ich
(ed.
) U
nder
stan
ding
Sel
f-R
egul
ated
Lea
rnin
g. S
an F
ranc
isco
: Jos
sey-
Bas
s Pu
blis
hers
.D
wec
k, C
. S.,
Chi
u, C
. & H
ong,
Y. (
1995
). I
mpl
icit
theo
ries
and
thei
r ro
le in
judg
men
ts a
nd r
e-ac
tions
: A w
orld
fro
m tw
o pe
rspe
ctiv
es. P
sych
olog
ical
Inq
uiry
, 6(4
), 2
67-2
85.
Hal
pern
, D. F
. (19
92).
Sex
dif
fere
nces
in c
ogni
tive
abili
ties.
(2n
d ed
.) H
illsd
ale,
NJ:
Erl
baum
.H
yde,
J. S
., Fe
nnem
a, E
. & L
amon
, J. (
1990
). G
ende
r di
ffer
ence
s in
mat
emat
hics
per
form
ance
: Am
eta-
anay
sis.
Psy
chol
ogic
al B
ulle
tin, 1
07, 1
39-1
53.
Kah
le, J
. B. &
Mee
ce, J
. (19
94).
Res
earc
h on
gen
der
issu
es in
the
clas
sroo
m. I
n D
. L. G
abel
(ed
.)H
andb
ool o
f R
esea
rch
on S
cien
ce T
each
ing
and
Lea
rnin
g. W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: N
atio
nal S
cien
ceT
each
ers
Ass
ocia
tion.
Kim
ball,
M. M
. (19
89).
A n
ew p
ersp
cetiv
e on
wom
en's
mat
h ac
hiev
emen
t. Ps
ycho
logi
cal B
ulle
tin, 2
,19
8-21
4.
610
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
Leh
tinen
, E.,
Vau
ras,
M.,
Salo
nen,
P.,
011c
inuo
ra, E
. & K
innu
nen,
R. (
1995
). L
ong-
term
dev
elop
-m
ent o
f le
arni
ng a
ctiv
ity: M
otiv
atio
nal,
cogn
itive
, and
soc
ial i
nter
actio
n. E
duca
tiona
l Psy
chol
ogis
t,
30, 2
1.35
.L
inn,
M. C
. & H
yde,
J. S
. (19
89).
Gen
der,
mat
hem
atic
s, a
nd s
cien
ce. E
duca
tiona
l Res
earc
her,
18,
17-2
7.M
acco
by, E
. E. &
Jac
k lin
, C. N
. (19
74).
The
psy
chol
ogy
of s
ex d
iffe
renc
e. S
tanf
ord,
CA
: Sta
nfor
dU
nive
rsity
Pre
ss.
Mag
nuss
on, D
., B
ergm
an, L
R.,
Rud
iner
, G.,
& T
ores
tad,
B. (
eds.
) (1
991)
. Pro
blem
s an
d m
etho
ds in
long
itudi
nal r
esea
rch:
Sta
bilit
y an
d ch
ange
. Cam
brid
ge: C
ambr
idge
Uni
vers
ity P
ress
.M
arch
, H. W
. (19
89).
Sex
dif
fere
nces
in th
e de
velo
pmen
t of
verb
al a
nd m
athe
mat
ics
cons
truc
ts:
The
Hig
h Sc
hool
and
Bey
ond
Stud
y. A
mer
ican
Edu
catio
nal R
esea
rch
Jour
nal,
26, 1
91-2
25.
Mee
ce, J
. L &
Hol
t, K
. (19
93).
A p
atte
rn a
naly
sis
of s
tude
nts'
ach
ieve
men
t goa
ls. J
ourn
al o
f E
duca
-tio
nal P
sych
olog
y, 8
5, 5
82-5
90.
Mee
ce, J
. L, B
lum
enfe
ld, P
. C. &
Hoy
le, R
. H. (
1988
). S
tude
nts
goal
ori
enta
tion
and
cogn
itive
enga
gem
ent i
n cl
assr
oom
act
iviti
es. J
ourn
al o
f E
duca
tiona
l Psy
chol
ogy,
80,
514
-523
.
Mee
ce, J
. L &
Jon
es, M
. G. (
1996
). G
ende
r di
ffer
ence
s in
mot
ivat
ion
and
stra
tegy
use
in s
cien
ce:
Are
gir
ls r
ote
lear
ners
? Jo
urna
l of
Res
earc
h in
Sci
ence
Tea
chin
g, 4
, 393
-406
.
Mee
ce, J
. L &
Hol
t, K
. (19
93).
A P
atte
rn A
naly
sis
of S
tude
nts'
Ach
ieve
men
t Goa
ls. J
ourn
al o
fE
duca
tiona
l Psy
chol
ogy,
85,
582
-590
.N
icho
lls, J
. G. (
1984
). A
chie
vem
ent m
otiv
atio
n: C
once
ptio
ns o
f ab
ility
, sub
ject
ive
expe
rien
ce, t
ask
choi
ce, a
nd p
erfo
rman
ce. P
sych
olog
ical
Rev
iew
, 91,
328
-346
.N
icho
lls, J
. G.,
Pata
shni
ck, M
. & N
olen
, S. B
. (19
85).
Ado
lesc
ents
' the
orie
s of
edu
catio
n. J
ourn
alof
Edu
catio
nal P
sych
olog
y, 7
7, 6
83-6
92.
Nie
miv
irta
, M. J
. (19
97).
Ind
ivid
ual d
iffe
renc
es in
mot
ivat
iona
l and
cog
nitiv
e fa
ctor
s af
fect
ing
self
-reg
ulat
ed le
arni
ng -
A p
atte
rn-o
rien
ted
appr
oach
. Em
piri
sche
Pad
agog
ik. S
ubm
itted
.N
iem
ivir
ta, M
. J. (
1996
, Sep
tem
ber)
. Int
entio
nal a
nd A
dpat
ive
Lea
rnin
g M
odes
- T
he S
elf
at S
take
.Pa
per
pres
ente
d at
the
2nd
Eur
opea
n C
onfe
renc
e on
Edu
catio
n. S
evill
a, S
pain
.N
olen
, S. B
. (19
88).
Rea
sons
for
stu
dyin
g: M
otiv
atio
nal o
rien
tatio
ns a
nd s
tudy
str
ateg
ies.
Cog
ni-
tion
and
Inst
ruct
ion,
5, 2
69-2
87.
Pint
rich
, P. &
De
Gro
ot, E
. V. (
1990
). M
otiv
atio
nal a
nd s
elf-
regu
late
d le
arni
ng c
ompo
nent
s of
clas
sroo
m a
cade
mic
per
form
ance
. Jou
rnal
of
Edu
catio
nal P
sych
olog
y, 8
2, 3
3-40
.
Pint
rich
, P. R
. & G
arci
a, T
. (19
93).
Int
rain
divi
dual
dif
fere
nces
in s
tude
nts'
mot
ivat
ion
and
self
-re
gula
ted
lear
ning
. Zei
tsch
rift
fur
Pad
agog
isch
e Ps
ycho
logi
e, 7
, 99-
107.
Pint
rich
, P. R
. & S
chra
uben
, B. (
1992
). S
tude
nts'
mot
ivat
iona
l bel
iefs
and
thei
r co
gniti
ve e
n-ga
gem
ent i
n cl
assr
oom
aca
dem
ic ta
sks.
In
D. H
. Sch
unk
& J
. L. M
eece
(ed
s.)
Stud
ent P
erce
p-
tions
in th
e C
lass
room
. Hill
sdal
e, N
J: E
rlba
um.
Schu
nk, D
. & M
eece
, J. (
eds.
). (
1992
). S
tude
nt's
per
cept
ions
in th
e cl
assr
oom
: Cau
ses
and
cons
eque
nces
.
Hill
sdal
e, N
J: E
rlba
um.
Schu
nk, D
. H. &
Zim
mer
man
, B. J
. (ed
s.)
(199
4). S
elf-
Reg
ulat
ion
of L
earn
ing
and
Perf
orm
ance
. Iss
ues
and
Edu
catio
nal A
pplic
atio
ns. H
illsd
ale,
NJ:
Erl
baum
.Sc
hunk
, D. H
. (19
94).
Sel
f-re
gula
tion
of s
elf-
effi
cacy
and
attr
ibut
ions
in a
cade
mic
set
tings
. In
D.
H. S
chun
k &
B. J
. Zim
mer
man
(ed
s.)
Self
-Reg
ulat
ion
of L
earn
ing
and
Perf
orm
ance
. Iss
ues
and
edw
catio
nal A
pplic
atio
ns. H
illsd
ale,
NJ:
Erl
baum
.
21
Schu
nk, D
. H. (
1991
). S
elf-
effi
cacy
and
aca
dem
ic m
otiv
atio
n. E
duca
tiona
l Psy
chol
ogis
t, 26
, 207
-231
.Sh
raw
, G.,
Hor
n, C
., T
hom
dike
-Chr
ist,
T. &
Bru
ning
, R. (
1995
). A
cade
mic
goa
l ori
enta
tions
and
stud
ent c
lass
room
ach
ieve
men
t. C
onte
mpo
rary
Edu
catio
nal P
sych
olog
y, 2
0, 3
59-3
68.
Skaa
lvik
, E. M
. & R
anki
n, R
. J. (
1994
). G
ende
r di
ffer
ence
s in
mat
hem
atic
s an
d ve
rbal
ach
ieve
-m
ent,
self
-per
cept
ion
and
mot
ivat
ion.
Bri
tish
Jour
nal o
f E
duca
tiona
l Psy
chol
ogy,
64,
419
-428
.Sk
inne
r, E
. A.,
Cha
pman
, M. &
Bal
tes,
P. B
. (19
88).
Con
trol
, mea
ns-e
nds,
and
age
ncy
belie
fs: A
new
con
cept
ualiz
atio
n an
d its
mea
sure
men
t dur
ing
child
hood
. Jou
rnal
of
Pers
onal
ity a
nd S
ocia
lPs
ycho
logy
, 54,
117
-133
.Sk
inne
r, E
. A, W
ellb
orn,
J. G
. & C
onne
ll, J
. P. (
1990
). W
hat i
t tak
es to
do
wel
l in
scho
ol a
ndw
heth
er I
've
got i
t. ou
rnal
of
Edu
catio
nal P
sych
olog
y, 8
2, s
. 22-
32.
Skin
ner,
E. A
. (19
95).
Per
ceiv
ed C
ontr
ol, M
otiv
atio
n, a
nd C
opin
g. T
hous
and
Oak
s, C
A: S
age.
Stoc
kard
, J. &
Woo
d, W
. (19
84).
The
myt
h of
fem
ale
unde
rach
ieve
men
t: A
re-
exam
inat
ion
of s
exdi
ffer
ence
s in
aca
dem
ic a
chie
vem
ent.
Am
eric
an E
duca
tiona
l Res
earc
h Jo
urna
l, 21
, 825
-838
.St
umpf
, H. (
1995
). G
ende
r di
ffer
ence
s in
per
form
ance
on
test
s of
cog
nitiv
e ab
ilitie
s: E
xper
imen
-ta
l des
ign
issu
es a
nd e
mpi
rica
l res
ults
. Lea
rnin
g an
d In
divi
dual
Dif
fere
nces
, 4, 2
75-2
88.
Und
heim
, J. 0
. & N
ordv
ik, H
. (19
92).
Soc
io-e
cono
mic
fac
tors
and
sex
dif
fere
nces
in a
n eg
alita
r-ia
n ed
ucat
iona
l sys
tem
: Aca
dem
ic a
chie
vem
ent i
n 16
-yea
r-ol
d N
orw
egia
n st
uden
ts. S
cand
ina.
vian
Jou
rnal
of
Edu
catio
nal R
esea
rch,
2, 8
7-98
.
Zim
mer
man
, B. &
Sch
unk,
D. (
eds.
). (
1989
). S
elf-
Reg
ulat
ed L
earn
ing
and
Aca
dem
ic A
chie
vem
ent:
The
ory,
Res
earc
h an
d Pr
actic
e. N
ew Y
ork:
Spr
inge
r-V
erla
g.Z
imm
erm
an, B
. J. &
Mar
tinez
-Po
ns, M
. (19
90).
Stu
dent
dif
fere
nces
in s
elf-
regu
late
d le
arni
ng: R
e-E
atin
g gr
ade,
sex
, and
gif
tedn
ess
to s
elf-
effi
cacy
and
str
ateg
y us
e. J
ourn
al o
f E
duca
tiona
l Psy
chol
-
ogy,
82,
51-
59.
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
22
App
endi
x 1.
Cor
rela
tions
bet
wee
n m
otiv
atio
nal v
aria
bles
and
lear
ning
str
ateg
ies.
Lear
ning
Per
form
ance
Avo
idan
ceM
_effo
rtM
_abi
lity
M_e
xtem
alA
_effo
rtA
_age
ncy
Sel
f-es
teem
Con
trol
CM
RR
ote
team
ing
Pla
nnin
gD
etai
lsE
labo
ratin
gG
PA
Lear
ning
1,00
26"
-,48
",4
2"-,
13"
-,32
"55
",4
3",3
8",4
954
"-.
0953
",3
8"55
"Jr
Per
form
ance
26"
1,00
21"
,24"
,20"
,01
,11"
20"
59,2
8",1
7"27
"56
26"
,18"
,01
Avo
idan
ce21
"1,
00-,
08,2
4",3
1"-,
42"
-20"
-,20
"-,
18"
-59"
,37"
-,43
"-,
08-,
17"
-,19
"
M_E
ffort
,42"
24"
-58
1,00
-,07
-,27
",1
3"28
"24
"51
"51
",1
1",1
7",1
8"26
"54
M_A
bilit
y-,
13"
20"
24"
-57
1,00
,38"
-,16
"-,
30"
-.14
".2
9"58
59-5
9-.
24"
M_E
xtem
al-5
2"51
51"
-,27
"58
"1,
00-,
24"
-.38
"-5
5"-5
7"22
"-p
i-5
5-5
4"
A_E
ffort
55"
,11"
-,42
",1
3"-.
16"
-24"
1,00
56"
.46"
AO
-.5
1"-.
08,3
9",2
9",3
3**
,38*
*
A_A
bilit
yA
3**
,20"
,28"
-,36
**-,
38**
,56*
*1,
00,7
0",7
1",4
4--,
16**
,11*
*,1
5",3
6",5
1**
Sel
f-es
teem
,38"
0924
"-,
35"
,46"
,70"
1,00
52"
59"
-,12
",1
4",2
3"57
"51
"
Con
trol
bel
iefs
,49"
,28"
-,18
"51
"-,
26"
-,37
"A
O"
.71"
52"
1,00
,44*
*-p
a20
"23
",4
4-.3
7"
CM
Rbe
*,1
7"-5
9",3
1"-,
14"
,51"
,44-
,39"
,44*
*1,
00-,
06,4
8**
A7"
,61"
,32"
Rot
e le
arni
ng-5
9,2
7"57
",1
1",2
9",2
2"-5
8-,
16"
-,12
"-5
4-5
61,
00-,
05,3
1**
-,08
-,23
"
Pla
nnin
g53
"56
-,43
",1
7"pa
-51
59"
,11"
,14"
20-
,48*
*-p
s1,
00,3
9"57
"-p
a
Det
ails
58"
26"
-pa
,18"
59-5
5,2
9",1
5"23
"23
"A
l"51
"59
"1,
0050
"-5
4
Ela
bora
ting
55"
,18"
-,17
"26
"-5
9-2
0"53
"56
"57
"A
4",6
1"-,
0857
"50
"1,
0025
"
GP
A,1
8"51
-,19
"54
-24"
-54"
58"
51"
51"
57"
52"
-.23
"-p
4-5
425
"1,
00
Cor
rela
tion
is s
igni
fican
t at t
he 0
.01
leve
l (2-
taile
d),
Cor
rela
tion
is s
igni
fican
t at t
he 0
.01
leve
l (2-
taile
d), C
MR
= c
ogni
tive
and
mot
ivat
iona
l reg
ulat
ion
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AE
LA
ILL
E24
AREA 1997
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OEM)
Educational Resources information Center (ERIC)
REPRODUCTION RELEASE(Specific Document)
I. DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION:
IC
Title: (E),J.(1: biFFE-e-N)--5 jrJ RO-rt LOC, 111T1V E 79-TIcia.NS OF SQ.-FEErt u -TEb LEA-124,N liJCI
Author(s): 11,A-kt&1ek) J. N e-*% I V i 1(Q14-Corporate Source:
UNtVEV_Sinf Cr' 11-6-1._c I Ni 14-1
Publication Date:
.3 - 9 4
II. REPRODUCTION RELEASE:
In order to disseminate as widely as possible timely and significant materials of interest to the educational community, documentsannounced in the monthly abstract journal of the ERIC system, Resources in Education (RIE), are usually made available to usersin microfiche, reproduced paper copy, and electronic/optical media, and sold through the ERIC Document Reproduction Service(EDRS) or other ERIC vendors. Credit is given to the source of each document, and, if reproduction release is granted. one ofthe following notices is affixed to the document.
If permission is granted to reproduce.the identified document, please CHECK ONE of the following options and sign the releasebelow.
ill Sample sticker to be affixed to document Sample sticker to be affixed to document 1=1
Check herePermittingmicrofiche(4"x 6" film),paper copy,electronic.and optical mediareproduction
"PERMISSION 10 REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC):'
Level 1
"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL IN OTHER THAN PAPER
COPY HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
e Ars7"-
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."
Level 2
or here
Permittingreproductionin other thanpaper copy.
Sign Here, PleaseDocuments will be processed as indicated provided reproduction quality permits. If permission to reproduce is granted, but
neither box is checked, documents will be processed at Level 1.
"I hereby grant to the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) nonexclusive permission to reproduce this document asindicated above. Reproduction from the ERIC microfiche or electronic/optical media by persons other than ERIC employees and itsSystem contractors requires permission from the copyright holder. Exception is made for nonprofit reproduction by libraries and otherService agencies to satisfy information need of educators in response to discrete inquiries."
Signatur ^e I , I , 00Position:
S erfleCAStla"
Printed Name:N filetz-v-0 ) NI E r-o V I RI-A
Organization:U N 1 v 025 rry OF vi-aC /iv Le...t
Address: DEPA kr t-UENT OF AS:DUCA:710N"Ft o .13DA 30f 1 N - 00011-f UNIVCQSIT4 OF t1iasiNt41
Telephone Number:l't 358 I 0 I 1 '3023
Date:,Li
T. N- A-ND OVER
C UA
THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICADepartment of Education, O'Boyle Hall
Washington, DC 20064202 319-5120
February 21, 1997
Dear AERA Presenter,
Congratulations on being a presenter at AERA'. The ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment andEvaluation invites you to contribute to the ERIC database by providing us with a printed copy ofyour presentation.
Abstracts of papers accepted by ERIC appear in Resources in Education (RIE) and are announcedto over 5,000 organizations. The inclusion of your work makes it readily available to otherresearchers, provides a permanent archive, and enhances the quality of RIE. Abstracts of yourcontribution will be accessible through the printed and electronic versions of RIE. The paper willbe available through the microfiche collections that are housed at libraries around the world andthrough the ERIC Document Reproduction Service.
We are gathering all the papers from the AERA Conference. We will route your paper to theappropriate clearinghouse. You will be notified if your paper meets ERIC's criteria for inclusionin RIE: contribution to education, timeliness, relevance, methodology, effectiveness ofpresentation, and reproduction quality. You can track our processing of your paper athttp://ericae2.educ.cua.edu.
Please sign the Reproduction Release Form on the back of this letter and include it with two copiesof your paper. The Release Form gives ERIC permission to make and distribute copies of yourpaper. It does not preclude you from publishing your work. You can drop off the copies of yourpaper and Reproduction Release Form at the ERIC booth (523) or mail to our attention at theaddress below. Please feel free to copy the form for future or additional submissions.
Mail to: AERA 1997/ERIC AcquisitionsThe Catholic University of AmericaO'Boyle Hall, Room 210Washington, DC 20064
This year ERIC/AE is making a Searchable Conference Program available on the AERA webpage (http://aera.net). Check it out!
S inrerel
a ence M. Rudner, Ph.D.Director, ERIC/AE
'If you are an AERA chair or discussant, please save this form for future use.
ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation
